Am Fr 29. August 2008 schrieb Andy Green: > Somebody in the thread at some point said: > | On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 12:29:22AM +0800, matt_hsu wrote: > |> Michael 'Mickey' Lauer wrote: > |>> Am Mittwoch 27 August 2008 17:43:45 schrieb Andy Green: > |>> > |>>> What I did was change the timer used in the resource for fiq on 2.6.27 > |>>> and it seemed to be OK then. We don't use the PWM for LEDs due to > |>>> > |> IIRC, we don't use PWM to drive LED due to suspend/resume. Since PWM > |> logic becomes odd after resuming. > |> In consequence, LEDs can't be blinking anymore after resuming. I sent > |> the patch to fix the PWM issue. > |> It should be worked if we use PWM for LEDs > | > | please also consider PWM for the vibrator. the vibrator is not > vibrating as > | strong in GTA02 than it did in GTA01. This is probably due to the > fact that it > | now runs on Vbatt rather than IO_3V3 (i thought it is just not good to > run a > | high-current consumer like an electrical motor off a digital power lane). > | However, the higher voltage (it is within spec of the vibrator) seems > to make the > | vibration less powerful. I suspect it is moving too fast to resonate. > | > | Having PWM on the vibrator would allow us to try to optimize the > optimum RPM > | for maximum vibration. > > We should have "PWM" on there Harald by FIQ, it should be similar > functionality as hardware PWM. > > It should respond to > > cat > /sys/devices/platform/neo1973-vibrator.0/leds/neo1973:vibrator/brightness > > as usual.
Seems like best performance is around 150 for brightness. Though difference isn't THAT remarkable. I agree, I also think it's a bad idea to run this motor off IO_3V3. Don't see any problem on vibrator nonfunctional when powered externally with no battery ;-) /jOERG
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
